Does it have hardware PPPoE offloading? Because it's a huge issue for those of us stuck with old-school telecoms for our fibre connections. Doing PPPoE at gigabit speeds needs something that can handle it.
They are working on an OpenWRT Two at the moment which will be Wifi 7.
OpenWRT runs on a lot of hardware and its a great way to extend the life of a router past the manufacturers patches as well as gain a lot of capabilities. I wouldn't buy a commercial router that wasn't supported by OpenWRT now.
The other devices based on the same filogic chip do have dual 2.5Gbps at least.
You can get a Wifi 7 device and 2x2.5GBps with Wifi 7 support already with the Asus BT8 and a few other devices. Asus's bootloader firmware flasher will take the initial OpenWRT image so its really quite simple to get going.
How will it handle PPPoE at gigabit speeds? I've been wanting to replace by terrible router from my ISP, but the options that can handle gigabit+ PPPoE are limited.
How about OPNSense on open hardware of your choice, and passing messy wireless to separate AP?
OpenWRT is very good, but the installation and upgrades are not easy. There is a zoo of images for different hardware, installation options and tools. It has to run on small devices, so there are limitations. The documentation on Wiki is scattered and could be improved.
I had to search forums for weeks for a custom package installation for my router. Right now I have been trying to upgrade to the latest version via LUCI for a while, and it stucks. Probably have to wait for few weeks, go through CLI and maybe search forums again.
I just thought I am paying a hefty time price for a bit more expensive x86 mini pc and AP.
> How about OPNSense on open hardware of your choice
Yes, it's a possibility, but if you want to tinker, I think a plain Linux distro like Debian is better. Turning it into a router is literally a couple of kernel parameters and a few iptables rules to set up NAT. Nowadays that's less than fives minutes of work with Claude.
This buys you much better performance and hardware compatibility relative to a BSD system, as well as lower resource usage and attack surface (no GUI or other unnecessary additions). WiFi support on BSD is bad, but on Linux you can use hostapd and almost immediately get an access point for free. And of course Linux is also better if you intend to run other stuff on the same hardware.
Maybe so. The documentation seems to be all over the map, and the GUI suggests using "attended sysupgrade" for upgrades.
...which I tried doing, a week or so ago, for a minor point release update within the 25.12.x series. And then the router went out to lunch and didn't come back.
Getting it going again wasn't so bad as such things go. My router has a huge advantage here in that it's a Raspberry Pi 4, so it's easy to remove/replace/re-do the flash device and start over.
(Except: I get all out of sorts when I need to do Internet stuff to fix my Internet connection while that Internet connection is absent.)
Yeah, for non-X86 devices, getting to U-boot with pressing a combination of PINs in particular order and conditions and releasing at right time is a pain.
I think I wasted $100,000 in salary for $100 more in device cost.
You're right, it's interesting that this device isn't the most technically superior in hardware or software, and isn't the most casual user friendly. It seems to be targeting a segment I can't bucket other than loyalists. Maybe good hardware & software for the cost?
I agree on the upgrade story, though supposedly the recent move to apk will help in that regard.
I moved from pfSense to OpenWRT due to the really poor IPv6 support in pfSense. I don't use the AP capability either. How are things in OPNSense these days?
Particular pain points from pfSense was that it published global IP as DNS address to LAN clients and no way around it, so connectivity broke every time prefix changed, and no real support for specifying prefix-less firewall rules or similar, so couldn't really expose anything via IPv6 without pain.
Off topic, but what amuses me about the "Wrt" name is that it was originally alternate firmware for the Linksys WRT54G router from 25 years ago. The name has stuck for whatever reason; I guess since only geeks use it and know what it is.
I'm pretty sure the software side of the project is a direct descendent from the WRT54G stack.
LinkSys got sued to release the firmware as it was GPL linked. This dump got modified to make the WRT54G way more powerful than LinkSys ever planned but they got to sell the hardware for years more than would have been expected at the time.
Yeah, I loved it because it allowed me to boost the signal above FCC-approved power requirements and saturate my house with that sweet 2.4GHz connection everywhere.
The best model of the WRT54G line. I would snag them at thrift stores for cheap to use for silly utility functions. I always referred to that particular model as "The highly-coveted WRT54GL."
I used a pair to provide Internet access at a Customer's construction site back in 2010. Cell phone hotspot wasn't a thing for me yet. We took a pair of WRT54Gs, configured one as a WiFi client, the other as a bog-standard router/AP, connected the LAN from the client to the WAN on the router/AP, pur a directional antenna onto the "client", and pointed it down the road toward a big business who offered free WiFi for Customers. We leeched off that until the real Internet service got installed. (It was a restaurant and we ate there at least once so we were Customers, right? >smile<)
I have one of these and love it, especially after I once bricked it during a manual software update and got to use the dip switch reset to reflash it using the ROM.
I wish it had more ethernet ports but I've managed to live with that. I'd be up for buying an OpenWrt Two as a backup or to replace this if it has even one more LAN jack.
I switched from a Google Wifi to this and found it to be just as stable, but with better range/signal strength, and easier to apply the parental controls I want.
I do it the opposite way, disable my kids' devices at night, but I suspect your desired method would also be supported using native features. I have found LLMs to be very helpful in providing the right settings.
There is a plugin marketplace that provides more features, like ad-blocking. I haven't played with those yet, so I cannot vouch for them.
I have and love my OpenWrt One for my main router. I have two, so that I have a backup one I can switch to if the first one ever dies. It is the best device to run OpenWrt on as it is fully supported hardware that has great images/packages for it. Routing speeds/buffer/latency are great, everything just works, price is very reasonable.
I don't use it for my APs, but that is mostly because I already had 3 TP-Link routers setup as dumb APs using OpenWrt that have been working great. If I did it again, I'd buy OpenWrt Ones though. Although Deco mesh kits I've used have worked exceptionally well, and have become my recommendation for friends/family that don't want to do things like run arbitrary packages on their router/APs.
That's enough connectivity for a gigabit WAN pipe and a LAN full of stuff (including one or more better/faster APs), if a person wants to slice it up that way.
A 5 port 2.5GbE switch would upgrade this to 5 total ports (4x 2.5GbE), and costs less than $100. If you only need 1GbE then it's even cheaper.
Outside of home-labs, it's rare for me to see any devices connected to the LAN side of a wireless router these days, and more than 1 (i.e. the non-portable device that is closest to the router) is exceedingly rare.
Neither my parents nor my wife's parents have their desktop connected to their router. The cable modem isn't even in the same room as the desktop.
[edit]
If it matters, my mom no longer has a desktop (she uses a docked laptop now), but it is true of the docking station and was true of her previous desktop.
It does raise the question that if it is for developers, what exactly is being developed? Especially if its not representative of hardware that is available; is there some advantage targeting a very particular chipset? This seems to be the only device using it
As someone who knows very little about WiFi, I always thought it sucked that if you wanted to go from 802.11this to 802.11that, it always requires brand new hardware with a different WiFi chip that implemented the new standard. Is there a good reason that software-defined 802.11 doesn't exist and that every new standard requires a different radio+SoC?
One example is the introduction of MIMO, a technique to send multiple data streams in the same frequency band in parallel. This requires multiple antennas, i.e. hardware which wasn't there in the previous wifi version. Note this was 2009.
There is definitely beauty in having a separate router device that chugs on just fine regardless what happens to the rest of your network. But I got bored with the constantly-churning embedded culture, bespoke OS's (sorry, OpenWRT), and VPNs generally want more CPU than what purpose-built "routers" have. So I just went back to the old way of using a plain Linux machine as the gateway (now virtualized, with NixOS and nftables) and couldn't be happier. WiFi AP is done by that same physical machine (not virtualized) and by two other amd64 machines that double as Kodi boxes. When you learn netfilter/iproute2, that experience carries to anything else you might switch to.
This thing has no practical purpose. The whole point of OpenWRT is to run it on cheap commodity hardware. This ticks none of those boxes.
It has two Ethernet ports, no switch. WHY?
Inexplicably can be powered via PoE, makes no sense if its purpose is to hang off your ISP's gateway (which almost certainly lacks PoE supply). PoE feature will never be used. You're not attaching this monstrosity to the ceiling.
It's utterly gigantic due to inefficient PCB layout.
Why is right to repair important for a throwaway router? Given what will usually fail are the hard to source ASICs.
By the time it breaks it will be obsolete anyway. As pointed out elsewhere in this thread they are already working on a successor.
There is so much better hardware out there manufactured in volume for cheaper.
It was likely a fun engineering project for someone but the business case isn't there.
But you can already do that with existing hardware that is 4x capable at the same price point, and runs OpenWRT.
A reference platform makes no sense for OpenWRT as by its nature it runs on dozens upon dozens of different hardware, all which are different and must be tested independently.
It will take time to build up to a point where it's competitive on paper, it's insane that you're comparing a first-gen product from a rag-tag crew to the hardware produced by behemoths that have thousands of engineers and billions of dollars to play with.
Where my use cases don't permit it I won't use this, but if it fits I would rather buy an open-hardware device at ~10x the price of an equivalent proprietary device not out of charity but because that is how much more value it provides to me at equivalent hardware performance.
There are no cheap commodity routers that can run OpenWrt, have modern Wi-Fi features, and are reasonably available (in the sense that you could buy one if your router fails).
OpenWrt is vastly superior to the proprietary software in commodity routers. Proprietary software gates software features behind more expensive models, even though the cheap hardware can handle them.
You also get software updates. Your hardware doesn't become a paperweight when the manufacturer refuses to fix a known, actively exploited vulnerability.
You'll get new features, for free.
> You're not attaching this monstrosity to the ceiling.
I would hide it, but whatever.
The enclosure is open source as well. You can build/print your own enclosure if you'd prefer, or get any enclosure for the Banana Pi BPI-R4.
They can't just ship a board without an enclosure, because it won't pass certifications.
For a around two years there, the dynalink dl-wrx36 was selling between $50 & $85 for comparable/better hardware. Still running a pair with an nss-enabled fork. Still effortlessly maxes out a gigabit fiber line with qosify.
Configured it so the 2.5gbe port connects towards the lan where a cheap wifi 7 AP can broadcast the additional signal if anything feel like it needs it. But practically speaking nothing does.
While the openwrt one was a decent experiment, it was far from the only hardware in the price range that had stellar openwrt support before/after it came out. And one thing people seem to forget about with a lot of options (like banana pi options) is that the range & falloff can be terrible. The openwrt two is apparently delayed & going with a different manufacturer.
Openwrt is great if you are willing to customize the software especially. The fact that it can be used as an actual wifi client in a pinch is also a lifesaver.
Long-long term availability is a different problem, but different manufacturers move on.
This is wrong. OpenWRT is fostering several manufacturers that are using OpenWRT as the factory platform for their products. This is a reference design (one of several, this particular one from 2024 is now dated and newer designs are available,) provided by OpenWRT, and they've thoughtfully made it available to anyone that might want one: you can just go buy some with no NDA bullshit and get your developers moving in your lab or doing UI development or whatever. The not-cost-optimized PCB is what you want for this, in addition to the ample RAM+Flash. The "useless" POE is another aspect of this: access points use POE ubiquitously, which is a key OpenWRT use case.
This sources PoE using a third-party daughter board which is mechanically way too big to package into any production access point. So no, that part of a reference design would never be used.
> get your developers moving in your lab or doing UI development or whatever
This is what the industry has been clamoring for among a sea of existing hardware: More garbage UIs glued atop of copy-pasted forgotten hardware.
I am an engineering manager. My job is to poke holes in money-burning projects.
Strange. A good engineering manager would see that "way too big" PoE daughter board design as exactly what one would want in a reference design that will be used to test and integrate your preferred PoE solution. Power product life cycles are so short and availability problems so frequent that a good engineering manager knows that their engineers will be reworking power solutions with some regularity.
> Inexplicably can be powered via PoE, makes no sense if its purpose is to hang off your ISP's gateway
No, this is supposed to replace the ISP-provided junk entirely. It will save you money and close a nasty backdoor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TR-069).
I think the purpose is to have a simple to hack on reference platform for developers. The problem with commodity hardware is the super short lifecycles (many of them stop selling before theres an OpenWRT port), they are locked down and the manufacturers will frequently make tons of internal revisions.
That's such an assumption of needs. For someone to be using a 10g capable NAT would be some sort of super nerd with such a small portion of the population. More and more households have no compute device other than their devices. With WiFi routers now being sold with OpenWRT installed, it no longer means you're in the nerd category for installing it.
It's not obsolete, it's basically the contemporary baseline. Remember, this is a cheap device. And unlike most Chinese garbage, you can be reasonably certain that it isn't backdoored.
Does it have hardware PPPoE offloading? Because it's a huge issue for those of us stuck with old-school telecoms for our fibre connections. Doing PPPoE at gigabit speeds needs something that can handle it.
They are working on an OpenWRT Two at the moment which will be Wifi 7.
OpenWRT runs on a lot of hardware and its a great way to extend the life of a router past the manufacturers patches as well as gain a lot of capabilities. I wouldn't buy a commercial router that wasn't supported by OpenWRT now.
The planned specs are here, they say it will be made by GL.iNet:
https://openwrt.org/voting/2025-02-12-openwrt-two
Otherwise this router from GL.iNet has OpenWRT preinstalled, Wifi 7, 5x2.5G:
http://www.gl-inet.com/en-gb/products/gl-be9300
> expected availability is late '25.
T-T. Any update on the timeframe (and presumably also I would expect the expected price to be solidly in the mid to high 300s at this point)?
Hopefully, dual 2.5gbe too?
The other devices based on the same filogic chip do have dual 2.5Gbps at least.
You can get a Wifi 7 device and 2x2.5GBps with Wifi 7 support already with the Asus BT8 and a few other devices. Asus's bootloader firmware flasher will take the initial OpenWRT image so its really quite simple to get going.
How will it handle PPPoE at gigabit speeds? I've been wanting to replace by terrible router from my ISP, but the options that can handle gigabit+ PPPoE are limited.
I'm hoping for one with at least two 10Gbps ethernet ports (one for upstream, one for downstream). Ideally more, but two would be great.
How about OPNSense on open hardware of your choice, and passing messy wireless to separate AP?
OpenWRT is very good, but the installation and upgrades are not easy. There is a zoo of images for different hardware, installation options and tools. It has to run on small devices, so there are limitations. The documentation on Wiki is scattered and could be improved.
I had to search forums for weeks for a custom package installation for my router. Right now I have been trying to upgrade to the latest version via LUCI for a while, and it stucks. Probably have to wait for few weeks, go through CLI and maybe search forums again.
I just thought I am paying a hefty time price for a bit more expensive x86 mini pc and AP.
Your OpenWrt ecosystem knowledge seems oudated; upgrades are a solved problem since the advent of "Attended Sysupgrade": https://openwrt.org/docs/guide-user/installation/attended.sy...
It's been included in all suitable default image configurations starting with OpenWrt release 25.12.
I do run OpenWrt on my x86-based router, on my AP, and even on my managed switches, and have no regrets.
Indeed, I was referring to Attended Sysupgrade in luci or CLI.
>OpenWRT is very good, but the installation and upgrades are not easy.
The solution is to use image-builder and bake your config into the image.
> How about OPNSense on open hardware of your choice
Yes, it's a possibility, but if you want to tinker, I think a plain Linux distro like Debian is better. Turning it into a router is literally a couple of kernel parameters and a few iptables rules to set up NAT. Nowadays that's less than fives minutes of work with Claude.
This buys you much better performance and hardware compatibility relative to a BSD system, as well as lower resource usage and attack surface (no GUI or other unnecessary additions). WiFi support on BSD is bad, but on Linux you can use hostapd and almost immediately get an access point for free. And of course Linux is also better if you intend to run other stuff on the same hardware.
Upgrades are “owut upgrade” these days. Pretty straightforward.
Maybe so. The documentation seems to be all over the map, and the GUI suggests using "attended sysupgrade" for upgrades.
...which I tried doing, a week or so ago, for a minor point release update within the 25.12.x series. And then the router went out to lunch and didn't come back.
Getting it going again wasn't so bad as such things go. My router has a huge advantage here in that it's a Raspberry Pi 4, so it's easy to remove/replace/re-do the flash device and start over.
(Except: I get all out of sorts when I need to do Internet stuff to fix my Internet connection while that Internet connection is absent.)
Yeah, for non-X86 devices, getting to U-boot with pressing a combination of PINs in particular order and conditions and releasing at right time is a pain.
I think I wasted $100,000 in salary for $100 more in device cost.
You're right, it's interesting that this device isn't the most technically superior in hardware or software, and isn't the most casual user friendly. It seems to be targeting a segment I can't bucket other than loyalists. Maybe good hardware & software for the cost?
I agree on the upgrade story, though supposedly the recent move to apk will help in that regard.
I moved from pfSense to OpenWRT due to the really poor IPv6 support in pfSense. I don't use the AP capability either. How are things in OPNSense these days?
Particular pain points from pfSense was that it published global IP as DNS address to LAN clients and no way around it, so connectivity broke every time prefix changed, and no real support for specifying prefix-less firewall rules or similar, so couldn't really expose anything via IPv6 without pain.
Off topic, but what amuses me about the "Wrt" name is that it was originally alternate firmware for the Linksys WRT54G router from 25 years ago. The name has stuck for whatever reason; I guess since only geeks use it and know what it is.
I'm pretty sure the software side of the project is a direct descendent from the WRT54G stack.
LinkSys got sued to release the firmware as it was GPL linked. This dump got modified to make the WRT54G way more powerful than LinkSys ever planned but they got to sell the hardware for years more than would have been expected at the time.
Yeah, I loved it because it allowed me to boost the signal above FCC-approved power requirements and saturate my house with that sweet 2.4GHz connection everywhere.
Recycled 4 or so WRT54G variants a couple years ago I ran Tomato on for friend's small businesses and my home in early 2000's.
I miss the Tomato UI/UX... I don't care for LUCU or OpnSense's UI by comparison...
Been using OpnSense for about 8 years now though... it's just been the best option for me, I use separate commercial AP.
I still have a WRT54GL sitting in a box somewhere.
The best model of the WRT54G line. I would snag them at thrift stores for cheap to use for silly utility functions. I always referred to that particular model as "The highly-coveted WRT54GL."
I used a pair to provide Internet access at a Customer's construction site back in 2010. Cell phone hotspot wasn't a thing for me yet. We took a pair of WRT54Gs, configured one as a WiFi client, the other as a bog-standard router/AP, connected the LAN from the client to the WAN on the router/AP, pur a directional antenna onto the "client", and pointed it down the road toward a big business who offered free WiFi for Customers. We leeched off that until the real Internet service got installed. (It was a restaurant and we ate there at least once so we were Customers, right? >smile<)
Similar to XBMC at least for a long time.
I have one of these and love it, especially after I once bricked it during a manual software update and got to use the dip switch reset to reflash it using the ROM.
I wish it had more ethernet ports but I've managed to live with that. I'd be up for buying an OpenWrt Two as a backup or to replace this if it has even one more LAN jack.
$106usd or $84usd without a case and antennas. That’s a solid price. Wish it had more than 1gb ram - goddamn datacenters.
I have one of these for a few months now. Works like a champ. Firmware updates are very easy now through the web interface.
I switched from a Google Wifi to this and found it to be just as stable, but with better range/signal strength, and easier to apply the parental controls I want.
Does it have parental controls natively or did you have to install something extra?
I would love to be able to whitelist which devices are allowed to access the internet during night time hours.
I do it the opposite way, disable my kids' devices at night, but I suspect your desired method would also be supported using native features. I have found LLMs to be very helpful in providing the right settings.
There is a plugin marketplace that provides more features, like ad-blocking. I haven't played with those yet, so I cannot vouch for them.
I have and love my OpenWrt One for my main router. I have two, so that I have a backup one I can switch to if the first one ever dies. It is the best device to run OpenWrt on as it is fully supported hardware that has great images/packages for it. Routing speeds/buffer/latency are great, everything just works, price is very reasonable.
I don't use it for my APs, but that is mostly because I already had 3 TP-Link routers setup as dumb APs using OpenWrt that have been working great. If I did it again, I'd buy OpenWrt Ones though. Although Deco mesh kits I've used have worked exceptionally well, and have become my recommendation for friends/family that don't want to do things like run arbitrary packages on their router/APs.
Just two Ethernet ports (1+2.5GbE), and it’s dual-band (no 6GHz)… I’m not sure who’s the target audience or what’s the use case.
That's enough connectivity for a gigabit WAN pipe and a LAN full of stuff (including one or more better/faster APs), if a person wants to slice it up that way.
A 5 port 2.5GbE switch would upgrade this to 5 total ports (4x 2.5GbE), and costs less than $100. If you only need 1GbE then it's even cheaper.
Outside of home-labs, it's rare for me to see any devices connected to the LAN side of a wireless router these days, and more than 1 (i.e. the non-portable device that is closest to the router) is exceedingly rare.
>Outside of home-labs, it's rare for me to see any devices connected to the LAN side of a wireless router these days
I would assume every gaming desktop computer would be? I actually assumed every desktop would be...
Neither my parents nor my wife's parents have their desktop connected to their router. The cable modem isn't even in the same room as the desktop.
[edit]
If it matters, my mom no longer has a desktop (she uses a docked laptop now), but it is true of the docking station and was true of her previous desktop.
2.5 is the WAN, so your lan is only getting 1g anyway
With OpenWRT, the network interfaces are whatever you want them to be. That's one of the perks. :)
It’s for developers as far as I understand, it’s not meant to buy as a consumer router. There is far better hardware you can get that runs OpenWRT.
It does raise the question that if it is for developers, what exactly is being developed? Especially if its not representative of hardware that is available; is there some advantage targeting a very particular chipset? This seems to be the only device using it
This is the official shop page afaict: https://www.bpi-shop.com/products/banana-pi-openwrt-one-rout...
where to buy?
As someone who knows very little about WiFi, I always thought it sucked that if you wanted to go from 802.11this to 802.11that, it always requires brand new hardware with a different WiFi chip that implemented the new standard. Is there a good reason that software-defined 802.11 doesn't exist and that every new standard requires a different radio+SoC?
Radio modulation / coding (at least for 802.11) benefits greatly from paralelism (lots of matrix multiplication etc).
I imagine that using an ASIC is way more cost efficient vs using a CPU.
One example is the introduction of MIMO, a technique to send multiple data streams in the same frequency band in parallel. This requires multiple antennas, i.e. hardware which wasn't there in the previous wifi version. Note this was 2009.
Are these for sale in the US?
There is definitely beauty in having a separate router device that chugs on just fine regardless what happens to the rest of your network. But I got bored with the constantly-churning embedded culture, bespoke OS's (sorry, OpenWRT), and VPNs generally want more CPU than what purpose-built "routers" have. So I just went back to the old way of using a plain Linux machine as the gateway (now virtualized, with NixOS and nftables) and couldn't be happier. WiFi AP is done by that same physical machine (not virtualized) and by two other amd64 machines that double as Kodi boxes. When you learn netfilter/iproute2, that experience carries to anything else you might switch to.
Some previous discussion around the launch in 2024:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42285689
This thing has no practical purpose. The whole point of OpenWRT is to run it on cheap commodity hardware. This ticks none of those boxes.
It has two Ethernet ports, no switch. WHY?
Inexplicably can be powered via PoE, makes no sense if its purpose is to hang off your ISP's gateway (which almost certainly lacks PoE supply). PoE feature will never be used. You're not attaching this monstrosity to the ceiling.
It's utterly gigantic due to inefficient PCB layout.
Why is right to repair important for a throwaway router? Given what will usually fail are the hard to source ASICs.
By the time it breaks it will be obsolete anyway. As pointed out elsewhere in this thread they are already working on a successor.
There is so much better hardware out there manufactured in volume for cheaper.
It was likely a fun engineering project for someone but the business case isn't there.
Open hardware is nice. I love that you can take a commodity router and claw back some control, but why not start with that control in the first place?
But you can already do that with existing hardware that is 4x capable at the same price point, and runs OpenWRT.
A reference platform makes no sense for OpenWRT as by its nature it runs on dozens upon dozens of different hardware, all which are different and must be tested independently.
It will take time to build up to a point where it's competitive on paper, it's insane that you're comparing a first-gen product from a rag-tag crew to the hardware produced by behemoths that have thousands of engineers and billions of dollars to play with.
Where my use cases don't permit it I won't use this, but if it fits I would rather buy an open-hardware device at ~10x the price of an equivalent proprietary device not out of charity but because that is how much more value it provides to me at equivalent hardware performance.
There are no cheap commodity routers that can run OpenWrt, have modern Wi-Fi features, and are reasonably available (in the sense that you could buy one if your router fails).
OpenWrt is vastly superior to the proprietary software in commodity routers. Proprietary software gates software features behind more expensive models, even though the cheap hardware can handle them.
You also get software updates. Your hardware doesn't become a paperweight when the manufacturer refuses to fix a known, actively exploited vulnerability.
You'll get new features, for free.
> You're not attaching this monstrosity to the ceiling. I would hide it, but whatever.
The enclosure is open source as well. You can build/print your own enclosure if you'd prefer, or get any enclosure for the Banana Pi BPI-R4.
They can't just ship a board without an enclosure, because it won't pass certifications.
For a around two years there, the dynalink dl-wrx36 was selling between $50 & $85 for comparable/better hardware. Still running a pair with an nss-enabled fork. Still effortlessly maxes out a gigabit fiber line with qosify.
Configured it so the 2.5gbe port connects towards the lan where a cheap wifi 7 AP can broadcast the additional signal if anything feel like it needs it. But practically speaking nothing does.
While the openwrt one was a decent experiment, it was far from the only hardware in the price range that had stellar openwrt support before/after it came out. And one thing people seem to forget about with a lot of options (like banana pi options) is that the range & falloff can be terrible. The openwrt two is apparently delayed & going with a different manufacturer.
Openwrt is great if you are willing to customize the software especially. The fact that it can be used as an actual wifi client in a pinch is also a lifesaver.
Long-long term availability is a different problem, but different manufacturers move on.
> This thing has no practical purpose.
This is wrong. OpenWRT is fostering several manufacturers that are using OpenWRT as the factory platform for their products. This is a reference design (one of several, this particular one from 2024 is now dated and newer designs are available,) provided by OpenWRT, and they've thoughtfully made it available to anyone that might want one: you can just go buy some with no NDA bullshit and get your developers moving in your lab or doing UI development or whatever. The not-cost-optimized PCB is what you want for this, in addition to the ample RAM+Flash. The "useless" POE is another aspect of this: access points use POE ubiquitously, which is a key OpenWRT use case.
This sources PoE using a third-party daughter board which is mechanically way too big to package into any production access point. So no, that part of a reference design would never be used.
> get your developers moving in your lab or doing UI development or whatever
This is what the industry has been clamoring for among a sea of existing hardware: More garbage UIs glued atop of copy-pasted forgotten hardware.
I am an engineering manager. My job is to poke holes in money-burning projects.
> I am an engineering manager.
Strange. A good engineering manager would see that "way too big" PoE daughter board design as exactly what one would want in a reference design that will be used to test and integrate your preferred PoE solution. Power product life cycles are so short and availability problems so frequent that a good engineering manager knows that their engineers will be reworking power solutions with some regularity.
> Inexplicably can be powered via PoE, makes no sense if its purpose is to hang off your ISP's gateway
No, this is supposed to replace the ISP-provided junk entirely. It will save you money and close a nasty backdoor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TR-069).
I think the purpose is to have a simple to hack on reference platform for developers. The problem with commodity hardware is the super short lifecycles (many of them stop selling before theres an OpenWRT port), they are locked down and the manufacturers will frequently make tons of internal revisions.
Gigabit / 2.5 Gbit connectivity is already obsolete. Any modern product must have 10gbe WAN with the hardware to back up NAT at that throughput.
That's such an assumption of needs. For someone to be using a 10g capable NAT would be some sort of super nerd with such a small portion of the population. More and more households have no compute device other than their devices. With WiFi routers now being sold with OpenWRT installed, it no longer means you're in the nerd category for installing it.
It's not obsolete, it's basically the contemporary baseline. Remember, this is a cheap device. And unlike most Chinese garbage, you can be reasonably certain that it isn't backdoored.
200 horsepower vehicles are also obsolete. Any modern car should have 500 horsepower with the braking and safety systems to back it up.
For a home network 2.5 is plenty.